Theory Discussion Area

[Eric]

Well, if the song sounds like C but with a Bb, that's C Mixolydian, not G Mixolydian.

Oh, right. I got my wires crossed there somewhere, thinking of the V as mixolydian and G being the V of C or something. I don't know.

I just looked up the song, and the chord sheet (it's a song we play in my church) goes D-Am7-C-G, and it says it's in D. After following the vocal melody on the guitar just now, it seems to sit on the G and A (particularly the A) a lot, and the C is most definitely the note that sounds a little quirky. It starts out almost every phrase on F#.

From that description, it seems like it's in D mixolydian just because of the C. I think perhaps my original thing about the Bb is because we sometimes take it down a step in church. The confusing part is that D really isn't part of the melody at all, so it's hardly a tonal center.

I guess that clarifies things...not at all, huh?

 

[woodchuk]

Actually, it does. With a chord sequence of D-Am7-C-G, and a partial scale of (- - F# G A - C), I'd say that D Mixolydian is dead on. You may not use the D note much in the melody itself, granted. However, the notes that are used, combined with the fact that the melody starts on a D chord and uses chords diatonic to G, pretty much confirms that D Mixolydian is right. Specifically, the C major chord that is based around the lowered seventh of C (the characteristic note of D Mixolydian) is a big sign. And if you take it a step down to C and keep the same sequence (C--Gmin7--Bb--F), you're in C Mixolydian. So I think that might cover it.

When you look at the chord sheet, does it give the key signature, or does it just say "Key of D?" If the latter, then technically it's not correct, but I guess they just notated it that way for the person who might not understand the mode aspect. If the key signature is given, look at it to make sure it's 1 sharp. That would verify the D Mixolydian tonality. Using 2 sharps (which is normally the key of D as the sheet states) would mean having to use naturals on the C notes in the Am7 and C chords, so that would be a little cumbersome for notating.

Make sense?

 

[GuitarAcademy]

While talking modes I would point out that the incidence of the characteristic modal note in the underlying chord progression (example the #4/11 in Lydian) makes a piece more modal, but Modal music tends to be more tonal in nature than melodic) It's very easy to think that what we are playing is a Pattern that we've identified as a Mode, however the underlying progression, not only of the chords themselves, but the way that the melody itself seems to want to resolve can very quickly take us from playing a mode to simply playing in a major key, by melodically hijacking the tonal gravity, and pulling it to the I chord.

In the example above, by going to the F at the end of that progression, it will be a REAL challenge to now keep C Mixo as the tonal center, It seemingly WANTS to stay on the F Major, and now C mixo, functionally is behaving as an extended F Major melody.

GA

 

[Monkus]

wow, one day I'll read this and understand it all...

 

[Eric]

OK, so next question: what differentiates a blues lick from a rock lick? For instance, Robert is always posting these videos with blues licks, which are very cool, but I'd like to know how to either 1) translate them to more rock-based music or, preferably, 2) know what makes them work so that I can make up some ones to use.

I tend to play more straightforward rock music (albeit in church, but we get fairly loud and a fair bit of distortion), so I'd like to find ways to use these same ideas of fills and licks for flavor, but have them translate better to music I actually play regularly.

From what I know of the blues, you play a minor pentatonic with a b5 added in (I think, though it's a b3 if you look at it from the...diatonic perspective?), which is the same as aeolian mode in that key. So if you're playing the blues in A, you'd use the A minor pentatonic (A aeolian/C ionian) and slip in a D#/Eb.

It seems like blues can't be described that well by classical theory, but I guess my question is what makes this sound like rock and this sound like blues?

 

[Robert]

Eric, it has a lot to do with the feel of the track itself. Blues is usually shuffle, and the overall sound is more "mellow"? Rock has an edgier sound, more distortion and usually doesn't "swing" the same way. It's different approaches.

 

[Katastrophe]

OK, so next question: what differentiates a blues lick from a rock lick?

A lot of rock licks are simply blues licks that are sped up, or played in a way to match the more straightforward rock tempo.

A good number of Robert's phrases in his videos would sound fantastic in a pure rock setting by just cranking up the gain on the amph!

 

[Eric]

A lot of rock licks are simply blues licks that are sped up, or played in a way to match the more straightforward rock tempo.

A good number of Robert's phrases in his videos would sound fantastic in a pure rock setting by just cranking up the gain on the amph!

Huh. I can see that, now that you mention it. Very interesting.

 

[vroomery]

I think the biggest difference tonally is the b5. This is especially true in the context of the 4/b5/5 walk up/down.

 

[GuitarAcademy]

OK, so next question: what differentiates a blues lick from a rock lick? For instance, Robert is always posting these videos with blues licks, which are very cool, but I'd like to know how to either 1) translate them to more rock-based music or, preferably, 2) know what makes them work so that I can make up some ones to use.

I tend to play more straightforward rock music (albeit in church, but we get fairly loud and a fair bit of distortion), so I'd like to find ways to use these same ideas of fills and licks for flavor, but have them translate better to music I actually play regularly.

From what I know of the blues, you play a minor pentatonic with a b5 added in (I think, though it's a b3 if you look at it from the...diatonic perspective?), which is the same as aeolian mode in that key. So if you're playing the blues in A, you'd use the A minor pentatonic (A aeolian/C ionian) and slip in a D#/Eb.

It seems like blues can't be described that well by classical theory, but I guess my question is what makes this sound like rock and this sound like blues?

A number of things, the tritone as a passing tone, and a b7th are a few, also a mixing of Major and minor 3rds and when you get Jazzy, chromatics and 9ths. Also a shuffle or swing pattern based upon triplets.

GA

 

[Robert]

What music class and where was that Robert?

/R

That was a private class I took in Umea. Actually, I took 2 different classes from different teachers. One of the classes was with Studieframjandet.

 

[GuitarAcademy]

That was a private class I took in Umea. Actually, I took 2 different classes from different teachers. One of the classes was with Studieframjandet.

The problem with viewing modes as scales in and of themselves from a guitarist standpoint is the inability to effectively know how or where to play them to achieve their modal characteristics. Even moreso with composing with them, beyond parroting some vamp, so in that sense, more often that not, someones mode is likely just an inversion of the major scale because of the context of the backing track.

Thats really the main criticism I have as to approaching modes as a scale, because most really don't know what to do with it or where to go with it from there.

GA

 

[woodchuk]

Sorry to be away for so long, gang. I'll try not to let this thread slide too far. Here's an interesting topic - what I like to call "Coltrane changes." The jazz saxophonist had an interesting way of reharmonizing the familiar ii-V-I progression. In the key of C, this would normally be seen as Dmin7--G7--Cmaj7. Coltrane, however, would normally play something that implied this:

Dmin7--Eb7--Abmaj7--B7--Emaj7--G7--Cmaj7

Where in the world would he be getting that, you may ask? Well, consider the augmented triad based on the root note of the song, in this case C augmented (C E G#). If you look closely, you'll see that the Eb7 and Abmaj7 are a V-I in the key of Ab (which is enharmonic to G#), the B7 and Emaj7 are a V-I in the key of E, and the G7-Cmaj7 are a V-I in the key of C. Notice that these 3 keys also represent the 3 notes present in the C augmented triad.

So, over this progression, you could play straight root-based triads across the whole thing, or you could use a little substitution for some melodic interest. For example, you could play a G#min triad over the Emaj7 and an Emin triad over the Cmaj7, then an F triad over the G7 to imply a G9sus4 sound. Or, you could use the corresponding Dorian mode over the minor triads, the Mixolydian mode over the dominant 7ths, and the Ionian over the major 7ths.

More later!

 

[Robert]

The problem with viewing modes as scales in and of themselves from a guitarist standpoint is the inability to effectively know how or where to play them to achieve their modal characteristics. Even moreso with composing with them, beyond parroting some vamp, so in that sense, more often that not, someones mode is likely just an inversion of the major scale because of the context of the backing track.

Thats really the main criticism I have as to approaching modes as a scale, because most really don't know what to do with it or where to go with it from there.

GA

For me it's the opposite. I view all modes as individual scales, because that makes it much easier to hear and apply the modal characteristics. Each mode of the major scale has its own sound, and by not only viewing it as another "form" (mode) of the major scale, all the chord/scales/intervals relationships become clearer, in my opinion.

 

[GuitarAcademy]

For me it's the opposite. I view all modes as individual scales, because that makes it much easier to hear and apply the modal characteristics. Each mode of the major scale has its own sound, and by not only viewing it as another "form" (mode) of the major scale, all the chord/scales/intervals relationships become clearer, in my opinion.

This is true .... if the note resolves to the Key note. What I mean, is if you are playing what you call E Phrygian and it resolves and seems to want to pull to C, you aren't playing E Phrygian at all, no matter what you call it, it's pulling to a C Major scale.

If while playing, considering the background, you get sense of finality and resolution with E Phrygian, say Em to Fmaj7 and back to Em, then you ARE playing and understanding what you call E Phrygian in a correct way.

Best,

Sean